Here is the beginning of the latest excellent column by Philip Stephens in the Financial Times:

The conventional story about Russia has been one of power reclaimed
after the fall to chaos during the 1990s. Oil, gas and autocracy have
restored it to the ranks of world powers. Some of the more hyperbolic
commentary has gone so far to say that, along with China, Moscow has
created an entirely new model to challenge western liberalism.

Yet
what most strikes me about Russia is its isolation. For all its
resurgent hydrocarbon revenues and its considerable, albeit residual,
military power, Moscow is essentially friendless. As for a superior
system of capitalism, when was the last time you heard an international
politician of any consequence hold up Russia as their chosen paradigm?

Moscow
can claim the odd loyal acolyte, sure. Many of the former Soviet
republics among its neighbours judge it wise to stay on side with the
present regime. Last year’s Russian invasion of Georgia served, in
Voltaire’s famous phrase, “pour encourager les autres”. Beyond the
post-Soviet space, mavericks such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez see some
advantage in travelling in Moscow’s slipstream.

Last 5 posts by Robert Amsterdam

• Grigory Pasko: Journalists Are Fleeing Russia - November 20th, 2009
• Evgeny Lebedev and the Londongrad Blues - November 20th, 2009
• The Obstacle of Pride - November 20th, 2009
• The Iron (Pipeline) Curtain - November 20th, 2009
• Yurgens: A Taliban-controlled Afghanistan is no picnic for Russia - November 20th, 2009